Colgan Flight 3407 Continued.

[Itchy]

Re: Plane Down in Buffalo - Colgan Continental Flight 3407

I don't know about throwing under the bus, but as a "general rule" not too wrong.
Lets face it, not too long ago people could go from 0 time to right seat in a regional line in less than a year. No reflection on the accident, just a general rule.

 

[Itchy]

Re: Plane Down in Buffalo - Colgan Continental Flight 3407

Watch this video, it might change your opinion:

NASA tailplane icing video

I find it hard to accept the tail stall theory. Generally, you would not lose roll control, and the 100kts near the end sounds like a different sequence?

 

[mooneyguy]

Re: Plane Down in Buffalo - Colgan Continental Flight 3407

True. My issue with the media is the fact that they get the public to believe them. :banghead:

I've been going from sad to more and more enraged the longer the media focuses on the accident.

Now remember the next time you make a decision based on what the media says...stop yourself and rethink it. Chances are its (what the media says) a load of crap!

Best thing you can do is shut the news off! I did about 5 years ago. Its pretty rare that I turn on a (made up) news channel.



To the media people here trying to find the "smoking gun" so you can break the next BIG story...do yourself a favor and really learn something here. You ALL really sound like a bunch of idiots on the news trying to act like you know something about aviation...Saabs now flying with jet engines, Us Air planes surviving a ditching because of the water temperature. Really its not hard to google an image of a 340

 

[Qgar]

Re: Plane Down in Buffalo - Colgan Continental Flight 3407

If some of the accusations being leveled here are true, I would be furious. All of us are incredibly sad and upset at this time. To think any human, be it a journalist, lawyer or some sick, twisted individual looking for info for his "blog" would join any website to glean info at this time is beyond comprehension. :whatever:
I like to think the best of people, but if this is indeed the case, I hope they would have the good sense to remove themselves from this and other websites, QUICKLY.
As someone who lost fellow crewmembers the other night and is trying to cope with it, please respect this community's privacy.

 

[Orange Anchor]

Re: Plane Down in Buffalo - Colgan Continental Flight 3407

Settle down a tad people.

Why get upset if in fact a non-pilot (whether press or lawyer or layman) has joined this site? Can't some good come of it instead of assuming that bad things will be the result?

Thank you for a voice of reason. One of the main complains often voiced loudly is the lack of knowledge by those reporting and when anyone comes to a forum asking questions, they are beaten about the head and shoulders. ???

I guess the old ground school axiom about no stupid questions does not apply.

This is not to say that we respond to the ghoulish, macabre or questions about 'what's it like?" but we can respond to wx, airplanes, systems etc and take the opportunity to educate and inform.

I could be wrong.

 

[MQAAord]

Re: Plane Down in Buffalo - Colgan Continental Flight 3407

I think the things that have been said here would be valuable information to a journalist looking to further understand aviation issues & people.

We trash on the media every time there's an accident/incident and we go off about how they "know nothing", they "have no clue" and "they should learning something about what they're talking about". So if one is actually here (and I have had WAY more going on my life lately than to delve into the occupations of new registrants) then I say cool, I hope they learn something. I hope they gain a better understanding of us, how we think, how things in our industry work.

 

[Orange Anchor]

Re: Plane Down in Buffalo - Colgan Continental Flight 3407

So if one is actually here (and I have had WAY more going on my life lately than to delve into the occupations of new registrants) then I say cool, I hope they learn something. I hope they gain a better understanding of us, how we think, how things in our industry work.

My point exactly. I have never been in a Q400 much less ridden in one but now know more about it, its anti-ice/de-ice systems, active noise/vibration systems, etc than before this accident. Amazing airplane... quite sophisticated.

 

[Velocipede]

Re: Plane Down in Buffalo - Colgan Continental Flight 3407

That's what I think a lot of people are missing. I commute on Q400 flight decks a lot. Though I'm not Q qualified, from observation it is manifestly clear that the Q is a big, complex airplane.

Its certainly NOT an entry level airplane. Loaded, it weighs about the same as the Convair 580. Anyone who writes off the Q as "just a little regional puddle jumper" is sadly mistaken.

 

[Orange Anchor]

Re: Plane Down in Buffalo - Colgan Continental Flight 3407

Anyone who writes off the Q as "just a little regional puddle jumper" is sadly mistaken.

But it has propellers.

I spent some time with the SAAB group for a bit and the propellers on the 2000 and location was worked out on a CRAY. Then they did all the tuning and such. Very sophisticated and complex but the average passenger knows little and props means ancient.

As for airplanes there are 3 maybe 4..
Piper Cub
Learjet
747 and of course
fighter-jet (pronounced FI-DER JIT)

 

[aloft]

Re: Plane Down in Buffalo - Colgan Continental Flight 3407

Talk about throwing your "brothers and sisters" under the bus...http://www.buffalonews.com/377/story/581544.html

Meh, I said the same thing earlier in this very thread. And really, concern over "throwing your 'brothers and sisters' under the bus" shouldn't even come into play when we're talking safety. Lives depend on it.

 

[pullup]

Re: Plane Down in Buffalo - Colgan Continental Flight 3407

Meh, I said the same thing earlier in this very thread. And really, concern over "throwing your 'brothers and sisters' under the bus" shouldn't even come into play when we're talking safety. Lives depend on it.

Of course they are "inexperienced" relatively speaking. But apparently there is an attitude of "I got mine" there. Soooo major airline pilots were born with 20,000+ hrs? People have to start somewhere, and I don't think 3,400 hrs is anything to sneeze at. Sully's 20,000 hrs. pale in comparison to someone with 30,000 or 40,000 but he is not inexperienced. My issue wasn't with him saying they are less experienced then major airline pilots but with his saying that that should raise some eyebrows and make passengers think twice.

 

[seagull]

Re: Plane Down in Buffalo - Colgan Continental Flight 3407

Of course they are "inexperienced" relatively speaking. But apparently there is an attitude of "I got mine" there. Soooo major airline pilots were born with 20,000+ hrs? People have to start somewhere, and I don't think 3,400 hrs is anything to sneeze at. Sully's 20,000 hrs. pale in comparison to someone with 30,000 or 40,000 but he is not inexperienced. My issue wasn't with him saying they are less experienced then major airline pilots but with his saying that that should raise some eyebrows and make passengers think twice.

Sorry, I am siding with "aloft" on this one. There is a BIG difference between 3,400 to 20,000 hours, and comparing 20k to 30k is just not the same thing. When I had 3,400 it felt experienced. I look back now and shake my head at that thought, and I would wager that most others with a lot more experience feel the same. Additionally, as sophisticated as a dash 8 might be, it doesn't come close to the capabilities of a transport jet that is 737 or larger size, in terms of handling the weather (unless you're comparing short field performance).

I do not have any opinions on this particular accident and do not even have any idea how much flight time the two pilots in this accident had, total or in type.

I will, though address a more general issue I have had for many years now regarding the regionals. I've am concerned that there are situations where you have a relatively inexperienced person in the left seat, and a low timer (relatively) in the right seat as well. You can be upset all you want, but I DO avoid flying on any of the regionals when the weather is marginal, and I don't put my loved ones on them either. Sorry if that offends. I used to work at one. I DO know what they are like, and I know the difference between what I saw then and what I see now. I have also jumpseated - a LOT. The difference is huge at every level, from work rules (which few would argue) to equipment, experience, training, procedures, understanding the environment, maintenance, standardization, etc.

This is not to say the crew was in any way involved, or maintenance, or the airline's particular procedures, etc. None of this may have had anything to do with this accident, it is just a general observation. As I said, I do not have enough information to form any opinion on what happened here, could have been a rudder hardover or a fluke structural failure for all I know, but my opinion on the differences between regionals and majors still stands.

 

[seagull]

Re: Plane Down in Buffalo - Colgan Continental Flight 3407

Very interesting discussion regards hours. And I wouldn't put it past some trial lawyer type to attempt to capitalize upon the regional/mainline differences, whether or not they would've been noticable or even a factor otherwise.

You shouldn't. I hope they do exactly that. As much as we complain about the legal system, and make claims that people made a safety improvement due to (insert here ALPA, government, FAA, "right thing to do"), the real reason has ALWAYS been liability. No doubt that they often go too far in the awards, but the bottom line is that the threat of that liability is how things get done. Can't say it would be a bad thing to force these outfits to hire more experienced people, (which would require actually PAYING for it, incidentally).

 

[Velocipede]

Re: Plane Down in Buffalo - Colgan Continental Flight 3407

When I had 3,400 it felt experienced. I look back now and shake my head at that thought, and I would wager that most others with a lot more experience feel the same.

seagull,

We'll probably get roasted for this, but I agree with you.

I've am concerned that there are situations where you have a relatively inexperienced person in the left seat, and a low timer (relatively) in the right seat as well. You can be upset all you want, but I DO avoid flying on any of the regionals when the weather is marginal, and I don't put my loved ones on them either. Sorry if that offends.

Given the choice, I usually commute on a 737, BUT I have no problem riding the QX Q400s.

but my opinion on the differences between regionals and majors still stands.

I can see your point. However, you must understand that there are marginal pilots at EVERY airline.

Can't say it would be a bad time to force these outfits to hire more experienced people, (which would require actually PAYING for it, incidentally).

Of course, that would be desirable. However, its all supply and demand. Just last spring, regionals were hiring F/Os with 500/50. Does that make it palatable? Its just a fact of life. Today, IF you can get a job, you're going ot need a lot more experience to land it.

 

[seagull]

Re: Plane Down in Buffalo - Colgan Continental Flight 3407

seagull,

We'll probably get roasted for this, but I agree with you.

Given the choice, I usually commute on a 737, BUT I have no problem riding the QX Q400s.

I can see your point. However, you must understand that there are marginal pilots at EVERY airline.

Of course, that would be desirable. However, its all supply and demand. Just last spring, regionals were hiring F/Os with 500/50. Does that make it palatable? Its just a fact of life. Today, IF you can get a job, you're going ot need a lot more experience to land it.

I think we agree. I would commute on a regional if there wasn't any choice, but, given a choice at all, I avoid them. I agree regarding marginal pilots, but the problem is worse at the lower tiers of the profession, and I agree with the last point, but, it is only a "fact of life" because of the market factors. If the liability were higher, they would have no choice but to pay a lot more, and they would generally get a lot more experience as a consequence.

 

[Malko]

Re: Plane Down in Buffalo - Colgan Continental Flight 3407

I have not re-read through the entire thread, but a point that I found interesting was that an identical Q-400 from Colgan flew the exact same route and landed almost a half hour after. I know that the wx can change rapidly but it will be interesting to hear what they encountered and what if anything may have been different.

 

[MikeD]

Re: Plane Down in Buffalo - Colgan Continental Flight 3407

I think we agree. I would commute on a regional if there wasn't any choice, but, given a choice at all, I avoid them. I agree regarding marginal pilots, but the problem is worse at the lower tiers of the profession, and I agree with the last point, but, it is only a "fact of life" because of the market factors. If the liability were higher, they would have no choice but to pay a lot more, and they would generally get a lot more experience as a consequence.

On that point regarding regionals, this [generally speaking, not in reference to this accident] is where the so-caled "race to the bottom" has gotten the industry. Look at some of the regional CEOs out there, Ornstein in particular. At one time, he could pick what he wants and the regional crews had little leverage since there were so many applicants for the jobs out there, and most were willing to "fly for food" figuratively speaking; the dreaded shiny-jet-syndrome. Until that situation improves, the problems inherent with some of the regionals won't improve. Again, not related to this accident, just a general comment.

 

[MikeD]

Re: Plane Down in Buffalo - Colgan Continental Flight 3407

I have re-read though the entire thread, but a point that I found interesting was that an identical Q-400 from Colgan flew the exact same route and landed almost a half hour after. I know that the wx can change rapidly but it will be interesting to hear what they encountered and what if anything may have been different.

Same thing happened with Delta 191 at DFW in 1985. Planes had been landing before and after.

 

[pullup]

Re: Plane Down in Buffalo - Colgan Continental Flight 3407

Sorry, I am siding with "aloft" on this one. There is a BIG difference between 3,400 to 20,000 hours, and comparing 20k to 30k is just not the same thing. When I had 3,400 it felt experienced. I look back now and shake my head at that thought, and I would wager that most others with a lot more experience feel the same. Additionally, as sophisticated as a dash 8 might be, it doesn't come close to the capabilities of a transport jet that is 737 or larger size, in terms of handling the weather (unless you're comparing short field performance).

So how does one rectify that situation? Someone has to CFI for 5,000 hrs? Fly freight? I just feel that there are some major pilots who were once low time regional pilots, but are now spouting off how inexperienced and dangerous the regional lackeys are. Like I said, they got theirs and are now trying to kick the ladder down.

This goes to the age old, dead beaten horse question...how many hrs before one is experienced enough?

 

[aloft]

Re: Plane Down in Buffalo - Colgan Continental Flight 3407

I just feel that there are some major pilots who were once low time regional pilots, but are now spouting off how inexperienced and dangerous the regional lackeys are.

Just to give you a little :sitaware:, I don't believe either of the major pilots you're locking horns with right now were ever "low time regional pilots". Both came from the military, so you're kinda barking up the wrong tree.

This goes to the age old, dead beaten horse question...how many hrs before one is experienced enough?

IMHO, there's no such thing as "experienced enough". Nobody ie experienced "enough" at everything, so there's always room for improvement. Like they say, even the highest time ATP is still a "student pilot".